Is Project M too easy relatively?

[Fortress]

Why is L-cancelling still being discussed. It's been like two pages since it was first being argued about. Seriously. Guys. Srs. Stahp.

 

[The_NZA]

Hi, you must be new to Link seeing as d-throw/d-air is a pretty BnB kill combo with Link. Ending lag doesn't mean **** when you've exploded the opponent after using a d-air while inside of them.

Hi, you must be new to Link. With a 10 6-frame jumpsquat, dair out of dthrow (especially when DI'd to force Link to move) isn't actually the easiest setup to land with consistency. I don't care what you see, when Nick Riddle does that to someone with consistency, it actually is impressive even if you can't appreciate it. Ending lag does mean something if you miss, which is pretty easy to do when you dthrow dair certain people with link.

 

[1MachGO]

^Link's jumpsquat is 6 frames iirc

 

[Bleck]

It would cripple characters like Ike who would effectively lose the ability to threaten space with their range. Characters with strong DD games would become even better through the means of baiting aerials or abusing their opponents' slower ground options to get in.

Dash dancing probably shouldn't be a thing either.

Why is L-cancelling still being discussed. It's been like two pages since it was first being argued about. Seriously. Guys. Srs. Stahp.

Stop posting about how people shouldn't post about things. You're not a moderator, nor do you need to read discussions that you don't feel are important.

 

[The_NZA]

Dribbling isn't arbitrary - in basketball, the only way to legally move the ball is to pass to a player. Dribbling arose as an interpretation of that rule whereupon it was not specified that the player you're passing to can't be yourself.

I guess it would be too much to assume that the average poster here actually knows anything about sports.

that does not even close to refute his argument. That's just a historical tangential point.

Everyone here has fire to talk smack and ***** about things like Link and Link-cancelling instead of just accepting their losses and moving on to get better. You want ot have a philosophical discussion about artificial barriers--fine. But let's not john about this local player or that local player who beat you, and you think its because of some poorly designed mechanic.

 

[Fortress]

Hi, you must be new to Link. With a 10 frame jumpsquat, dair out of dthrow (especially when DI'd to force Link to move) isn't actually the easiest setup to land with consistency. I don't care what you see, when Nick Riddle does that to someone with consistency, it actually is impressive even if you can't appreciate it. Ending lag does mean something if you miss, which is pretty easy to do when you dthrow dair certain people with link.

No, it's pretty easy.

Stop posting about how people shouldn't post about things. You're not a moderator, nor do you need to read discussions that you don't feel are important.

Don't have to be a moderator to bring up what pretty much everybody feels is a toxic and **** topic of discussion.

 

[Saito]

L-Cancelling does not have an interaction based with it.

Other mechanics that might be compared to L-Cancelling all have an interaction that can be punished for not doing right, as opposed to L-Cancelling which just plain out rewards the character.

The main thing is that people don't seem to like that...

 

[The_NZA]

^Link's jumpsquat is 6 frames iirc

You are correct. I will fix that in my post.

 

[Bleck]

that does not even close to refute his argument.

His argument is that dribbling is comparable to L-canceling in the sense that they're both arbitrary physical mechanics in the game. This isn't true, as Super Smash Bros. still works the same way, generally, regardless of the presence of L-canceling, whereas basketball would be played entirely differently if players were not allowed to move (or, more pertinently, were allowed to move without dribbling).

Don't have to be a moderator to bring up what pretty much everybody feels is a toxic and **** topic of discussion.

Saying that "pretty much everybody" agrees with the opinion you're putting forth is what people do when they don't have anything more reasonable to support what they're saying.

If moderators decide that this line of discussion is to be off limits, than that's their business. Until then, stop telling people what to post about.

 

[Soft Serve]

stop talking about L-canceling, the argument will go nowhere, just like a shielda argument would.


I would disagree that PM is less technical. I think with the addition of so many new techniques, many that expand off of older ones (DACUS is paralell to melee boost grabs, and AGTs are unique and derived from both melee airdodges and brawl glide tosses) makes the game MORE technical and challenging. With RARs, Wave bounces, b-turnarounds, turnaround grabs, DACUS's, "gatling combos", C-dashing, AGTs, GTs, FOOSTOOLS, c-stick auto ledge cancels, and tons of others in the game, you can ignore most of them and just play like you were playing melee as they don't interfere with old methods, but a lot of characters can make incredible uses of these techniques and ignoring them is playing sub-optimally.

I would argue that while the tech floor is slightly lower (a frame isn't that much to base arguments about) the tech ceiling is vastly higher with the massive amount of new options that EVERYONE has access to.

 

[Saito]

Dash dancing probably shouldn't be a thing either.

Mindgame related.

I highly doubt most people would want it gone.

 

[mimgrim]

It would cripple characters like Ike who would effectively lose the ability to threaten space with their range. Characters with strong DD games would become even better through the means of baiting aerials or abusing their opponents' slower ground options to get in.

Not really.

Ike has good tilts, with really good range. Zoning in the air is still entirely possible as well, but would require more precise spacing (So as to get yourself in a way so you don't need to L-cancel).

L-cancel just makes aerial too free, imo, and if these certain character rely on the mechanic so much, which they don't, then something is wrong with their design. Smash is, primarily, a air-based fighter. There should be more trade-offs for going into the air because of that

 

[LOGIA666]

Mindgame related.

I highly doubt most people would want it gone.

Agreed. It's a staple for characters like Marth. Getting rid of it would piss alot of people off.

 

[Saito]

What's the thing in smash most closely related to L-cancelling?

...I'd have to say marth.

 

[Bleck]

Mindgame related.

I highly doubt most people would want it gone.

Well, I don't think dash dancing is as egregious as L-canceling, so I don't think it needs to be removed entirely. But I do think that characters who benefit the most from it are characters that already have very significant strengths, and that the technique should be normalized in some capacity so that every character has access to it at the same efficiency - while characters like Fox and Marth certainly rely on it for mindgames, I'm still not so sure that nerfing something that indirectly nerfs their options (or buffing it for other characters, either way) is necessarily a bad idea.

I still think Marth is the worst designed character in Smash, though, so what do I know.

 

[Saito]

I still think Marth is the worst designed character in Smash, though, so what do I know.

Why is that?

Also this goes a bit of hand in hand with what I was going to say about marth in regards to L-Cancelling.

He reminds me of it in the form of his Tipper mechanic.

As with L cancelling, there is no (as far as I know) reason NOT to tip.
As with L cancelling, the mechanic requires the player to know how to do it in the form of distance. This essentially is the Timing of L cancels.
As with L cancelling, the moves are (as far as I know) harder to punish on a tip as opposed to just any normal hit.
As with L cancelling, (most of) the potential follow ups are only possible with successful tips.

The difference here though is that Marth is one character. If you can't space well to Tip you can always play another character. L cancelling is a universal mechanic. If it was a tool that maybe one character had access to like bowser or something to reduce his aerial lag, it might be seen as a better mechanic because it adds depth to that specific character's play.

Kind of like Aerial Glide Toss with the characters that can really utilize it.
If all characters could do it (By do it, I mean reasonably in the sense of bringing out an item in mid air and being able to take advantage of it like link) I'm sure it would be seen as just as bad as L cancelling if not worse.

 

[1MachGO]

Dribbling isn't arbitrary - in basketball, the only way to legally move the ball is to pass to a player. Dribbling arose as an interpretation of that rule whereupon it was not specified that the player you're passing to can't be yourself.

I guess it would be too much to assume that the average poster here actually knows anything about sports.

All you are really saying is that dribbling is the legal method of bypassing a rule. If that is the case, the rule of being unable to move with the ball becomes arbitrary because it can be bypassed. Regardless, the origin of the rule has nothing to do with my main point.

His argument is that dribbling is comparable to L-canceling in the sense that they're both arbitrary physical mechanics in the game. This isn't true, as Super Smash Bros. still works the same way, generally, regardless of the presence of L-canceling, whereas basketball would be played entirely differently if players were not allowed to move (or, more pertinently, were allowed to move without dribbling).

If dribbling was employed to bypass a rule, then that rule clearly doesn't have that significant of an impact. If players were allowed to move without dribbling the game would fundamentally play the same. Players would still be moving the ball up the court, passing to teammates, and shooting baskets. The key difference is that it would be done without dribbling so there is a loss of depth to the game.

Going back to L-Cancelling, I wasn't trying to imply that it is as prevalent as dribbling, but my point still stands that it adds more to the game than its absence would; much like dribbling.

 

[Bleck]

Why is that?

That's probably too far removed from the topic, though I'll probably post about it somewhere else eventually.

All you are really saying is that dribbling is the legal method of bypassing a rule. If that is the case, the rule of being unable to move with the ball becomes arbitrary because it can be bypassed.

Good point.

If players were allowed to move without dribbling the game would fundamentally play the same. Players would still be moving the ball up the court, passing to teammates, and shooting baskets. The key difference is that it would be done without dribbling so there is a loss of depth to the game.

I disagree - if players were allowed to move without dribbling, there'd be significantly less reason to pass, and defensive play would have to be more oriented around physically blocking the person than the current norm, where defense is more oriented around blocking (and stealing) the ball itself. Dribbling, and rules about travelling, force the players to focus more on the ball than they'd otherwise have to.

Without dribbling, basketball would essentially transform into football with hoops - the entire game would fundamentally be changed, except for the overall goal (shoot hoops). Contrary to this, the removal of L-canceling wouldn't really change Smash' overall fundamentals; note that, despite the huge differences in metagame, all the Smash Bros. games share the same fundamental play patterns, and even characters like Fox and Falco that feature L-canceling heavily in their high-end technical streams are still very strong characters in Brawl (would arguably be even stronger had they retained their Melee-era Reflectors).

 

[1MachGO]

I disagree - if players were allowed to move without dribbling, there'd be significantly less reason to pass, and defensive play would have to be more oriented around physically blocking the person than the current norm, where defense is more oriented around blocking (and stealing) the ball itself. Dribbling, and rules about travelling, force the players to focus more on the ball than they'd otherwise have to.

Without dribbling, basketball would essentially transform into football with hoops - the entire game would fundamentally be changed, except for the overall goal (shoot hoops). Contrary to this, the removal of L-canceling wouldn't really change Smash' overall fundamentals; note that, despite the huge differences in metagame, all the Smash Bros. games share the same fundamental play patterns, and even characters like Fox and Falco that feature L-canceling heavily in their high-end technical streams are still very strong characters in Brawl (would arguably be even stronger had they retained their Melee-era Reflectors).

I feel as though you are focusing too much on the dribbling analogy when the main reason it exists is to segue into an argument in favor of L-Cancelling. Granted, it is partially my fault for continuing to respond to your attacks towards the analogy but it is ultimately irrelevant because it has nothing to do with smash. The point still remains that L-Cancelling adds more to the game than its removal would.

 

[mimgrim]

What's the thing in smash most closely related to L-cancelling?

...I'd have to say marth.

Nah.

Marth is still a top tier character in Brawl, where L-cancel is lacking, and still remains as one of the best zoners in the game. So the notion he relies on it more then other characters is lacking.

 

[Phaiyte]

I'm sorry but you should feel bad for this post.

What kill move do you think works out of dthrow? dair/uair with their ridiculous landing lag without an l cancel, or fair which only works on very particular DI/weight/percent?

Post quality here is dropping...fast.

Literally every aerial works and upB works on fast fallers. Your post quality is dropping...fast.

 

[ItsRainingGravy]

Direction this thread is going:

 

[EPsilon933]

Dribbling makes basketball interesting. That's a requirement that makes the sport interesting. It changes the way basketball is played drastically. L canceling doesn't change the game drastically and it's not an interesting change

 

[1MachGO]

Dribbling makes basketball interesting. That's a requirement that makes the sport interesting. It changes the way basketball is played drastically. L canceling doesn't change the game drastically and it's not an interesting change

If you only value risk/reward differentiation and don't like technical depth (or the nuances it provides) then you are correct on the basis of opinion. However, objectively speaking, L-Cancelling adds to the game's depth.

 

[EPsilon933]

If you only value risk/reward differentiation and don't like technical depth (or the nuances it provides) then you are correct on the basis of opinion. However, objectively speaking, L-Cancelling adds to the game's depth.

Objectively speaking, the benefits of manual l canceling are tiny compared to the benefits of having the effect of l canceling automatic

 

[Saito]

Nah.

Marth is still a top tier character in Brawl, where L-cancel is lacking, and still remains as one of the best zoners in the game. So the notion he relies on it more then other characters is lacking.

That's not what I meant actually.

I'm not saying marth benefits the most from L cancelling.

I'm saying the gimmick of marth in his tips dealing more damage is the most similar thing to L cancelling in smash brothers.

 

[Strong Badam]

approximately all of the analogies for l-canceling have been absolutely horrendous. reminds me of that time someone said "it's like how you would never want to miss an edgeguard." like really. entirely different things.

basketball and smash test extremely different skillsets and they value different things. you also literally cannot compare sports to video games in this context, because there aren't buttons to press. everything you do IRL is 100% physically necessary to accomplish what you're doing, whereas video games are specifically designed with what you need to do and can be improved upon. the proper analogy would be manual dribbling vs automatic dribbling, but that makes no sense.

 

[9bit]

Every time...

 

[LOGIA666]

Every time...

[/
quote]

LOL, thank you for this.

 

[mimgrim]

Every time...

What can I say. I'm a sucker for arguments that have been beaten to death and back.

 

[1MachGO]

Objectively speaking, the benefits of manual l canceling are tiny compared to the benefits of having the effect of l canceling automatic

How so? TBH, I can only think two reasonable arguments against L-Cancelling:

1. It raises the skill floor
You could say that it harms accessibility and I do think this is a fair point, but overall, its a pretty weak stance. If something silly like "L-Cancelling" turns a competitive player away, chances are they wouldn't have improved much further anyway. Furthermore, you could even argue that the presence of L-Cancelling helps draw players who find technical mastery appealing. Its also generally agreed that the technique isn't even that hard to master so the floor doesn't get raised that much by its presence (not that it was very high entry to begin with).

2. It is arbitrary in nature
Sakurai is probably the only person in the world who would think to put something like L-cancelling in a game. I can't refute that, but I find that L-Cancelling's benefits go beyond its implications. L-Cancelling, though odd, is still an addition to the game. It creates depth through its interactions with other concepts/mechanics. This doesn't extend to just shielding/teching/etc. but also player reaction times and the technical/mental duality of this game. Putting that in perspective, I think its easy to forgive its arbitrary nature.

 

[EPsilon933]

How so? TBH, I can only think two reasonable arguments against L-Cancelling:

1. It raises the skill floor
You could say that it harms accessibility and I do think this is a fair point, but overall, its a pretty weak stance. If something silly like "L-Cancelling" turns a competitive player away, chances are they wouldn't have improved much further anyway. Furthermore, you could even argue that the presence of L-Cancelling helps draw players who find technical mastery appealing. Its also generally agreed that the technique isn't even that hard to master so the floor doesn't get raised that much by its presence (not that it was very high entry to begin with).

2. It is arbitrary in nature
Sakurai is probably the only person in the world who would think to put something like L-cancelling in a game. I can't refute that, but I find that L-Cancelling's benefits go beyond its implications. L-Cancelling, though odd, is still an addition to the game. It creates depth through its interactions with other concepts/mechanics. This doesn't extend to just shielding/teching/etc. but also player reaction times and the technical/mental duality of this game. Putting that in perspective, I think its easy to forgive its arbitrary nature.

I think some of us aren't putting into enough consideration that video games are toys. They're things to play with to have fun. Adding an arbitrary input just because limits the capabilities of people who aren't playing to win. Casual gamers vastly outnumber competitive gamers by an extremely big margin. How is a technical demand that opens up almost 0 new options appealing? More would be turned away from that technical demand. The difficulty of the move isn't as much of a concern as you might think it is. Or at least I'm not worried about it too much. The problem is that it's always better to do it and it should always be done. However, having to hit l/r/z so often doesn't feel very good. It taxes the player's mind and fingers unnecessarily. It wears out players faster than if it didn't exist. (We're defining mastery as learning it to be able to do it (close to) 100% of the time, right?)

It's an addition of a handicap on the player. That doesn't do much to add depth

 

[Empyrean]

Post quality here is dropping...fast.

this thread sucks...

You said it yourself, sir.

 

[Y-L]

I think some of us aren't putting into enough consideration that video games are toys. They're things to play with to have fun. Adding an arbitrary input just because limits the capabilities of people who aren't playing to win. Casual gamers vastly outnumber competitive gamers by an extremely big margin. How is a technical demand that opens up almost 0 new options appealing? More would be turned away from that technical demand. The difficulty of the move isn't as much of a concern as you might think it is. Or at least I'm not worried about it too much. The problem is that it's always better to do it and it should always be done. However, having to hit l/r/z so often doesn't feel very good. It taxes the player's mind and fingers unnecessarily. It wears out players faster than if it didn't exist. (We're defining mastery as learning it to be able to do it (close to) 100% of the time, right?)

It's an addition of a handicap on the player. That doesn't do much to add depth

Casual gamers have no obligation to L cancel and other casual gamers they play are probably not L canceling either. Let the competitive players have it.

 

[EPsilon933]

Casual gamers have no obligation to L cancel and other casual gamers they play are probably not L canceling either. Let the competitive players have it.

Casual gamers have no interest in things that complicate gameplay. Making their attacks and movement slower limits their ability to approach. Casual gamers hate camping

 

[Y-L]

Casual gamers have no interest in things that complicate gameplay. Making their attacks and movement slower limits their ability to approach. Casual gamers hate camping

The thing is it isn't making it slower. To be honest casual players probably would even notice the difference or care. What you're suggesting is that the end lag on all their aerials is cut in half just because.

 

[EPsilon933]

The thing is it isn't making it slower. To be honest casual players probably would even notice the difference or care. What you're suggesting is that the end lag on all their aerials is cut in half just because.

Yeah it is. They can't fulfill the requirement to not be slow. You think they wouldn't notice when a player can land with Link's dair faster than someone else? They might not be able to notice most, but it still affects them. Getting rid of an extra requirement does no harm to them. It doesn't eliminate options for them and it keeps the simplicity of the game. In fact, having the effect automatic makes it even more simple for them

 

[Y-L]

Yeah it is. They can't fulfill the requirement to not be slow. You think they wouldn't notice when a player can land with Link's dair faster than someone else? They might not be able to notice most, but it still affects them. Getting rid of an extra requirement does no harm to them. It doesn't eliminate options for them and it keeps the simplicity of the game. In fact, having the effect automatic makes it even more simple for them

Why would they even be fighting a Link who is L canceling? Casual players fight casual players. When I was a casual none of my friends were L canceling. It's all relative. They aren't slow in the eyes of the people they're playing because no one else is L canceling that's why they are "casuals".
Casuals aren't complaining and they don't have to do it, and the people they play aren't using it either so your argument doesn't really hold up.
What it does affect is the credibility of the skill floor.

 

[Empyrean]

Real talk

The Ganon vs casuals matchup is 100-0 in Ganon's favor.

 

[EPsilon933]

Why would they even be fighting a Link who is L canceling? Casual players fight casual players. When I was a casual none of my friends were L canceling. It's all relative. They aren't slow in the eyes of the people they're playing because no one else is L canceling that's why they are "casuals".
Casuals aren't complaining and they don't have to do it, and the people they play aren't using it either so your argument doesn't really hold up.
What it does affect is the credibility of the skill floor.

I'm pointing out that the difference is noticeable even to casual gamers. Not everyone a casual plays against is another casual dumbed down as much as you think. There are casual players out there who like playing with tournament rules and even compete among themselves, but don't have the real commitment to go beyond that

Casual Smashers have complained a lot about l canceling. 'Tourneyfag. I play for fun' -my impersonation of 1. Also, they've complained about Melee being broken because of glitches, wavedashing, and l canceling. Have you never heard of that? They complain about other people doing it, to be exact. Enabling them to do the effect of 1 of those things too would be nice for them

What's so bad about enabling noobs to do more? The effect being automatic would have minimal cost on the competitive players and would even benefit them. It's not bad game design like a comeback mechanic